Canon vs. Sony?

[freeonlineFFF]

I'm planning on buying a budget $700 of slr camera. I don't want to spend more. so I have been looking around at different forums and suggestions from cnet and it just seems more people lean towards canon's cameras?
Canon EOS Rebel XTi
Sony Alpha DSLR-A100
Let me know what you guys think . . . any suggestion as to which camera to get would be really helpful and appreciated . . . Thanks

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Canon have been the top-seller for ages, although recently overtaken by their really major rival, Nikon. Sony are establishing themselves in the SLR business having bought Konica-Minolta. Consequently, both Canon and Nikon have much clearer product lines and offer a cohesive upgrade path from a beginner SLR like the XTi right through to top-end pro stuff.

I can't really comment on which is better out of Canon & Nikon. I'm a Canon shooter myself, and since I have in excess of £8k invested in Canon gear, I'm simply never going to switch to another brand. You need to pick a brand now that you'll live with pretty much forever.

With regard to the two cameras that you've shortlisted, I would choose the Canon, but then it is what I know! One key difference between Canon & Sony is that with Canon gear, the Image Stabiliser kit is installed in the lenses, whereas the Sony IS kit is in the body. Whilst this means that you have to buy the IS facility in all your stabilised lenses, it does also mean that the IS is optimised for that lens, where a single body cannot hope to cope with the differing IS requirements of, say, a 17-55mm walkabout lens and a 600mm super-telephoto.

Canon have announced the replacement for the XTi, called XSi, I think. It should mean that there's a deal to be done on the XTi.

 

[Der Alta]

My wife uses a REbel. It's about 3 years old now, but still shots fantastic shots. At teh end of the year, we're upgrading to a new camera and she'll be looking at a Nikon or a Canon. She's slowly figuring out that if she goes with Nikon, it's going to mean new lenses and new gear. Whereas Canon means new body, and a pile of lenses that she already has.

GG is right. Pick the camera that you want, as you'll be limited to that as you upgrade (provided you are picking up lenses as you upgrade).

 

[exigeracer]

I've owned the A100 for a bit over a year, and I haven't had a single problem with it. Not one. I haven't been torturing it, but I do take it to the ski hills to shoot in the cold, and I do take it on hikes and it gets battered around at parties (it withstood a wine glass being spilled directly on it). The screen is far larger on the Sony than the Rebel, and the camera feels so much better in your hands (go to the shop and hold them both). My only gripe after 7000 exposures is that I'm approaching the stock lens's capabilities. It lasted a good while before I started feeling a lack of sharpness at times, but in the time before that, the 18-70 was good for mostly anything a non-pro photog could need. The 3fps is great too.

I'd recomend going the Sony route, to be different if not anything. I've met one person with the a100 in my entire ownership, and we had a good chat for a while about the camera and why more people don't have one. I don't think this would've happened with any other camera. Sony just announced the a200, which is an update to the a100, so that means the a100 might go down even more, or get discontinued entirely. They redid the body casing and moved some of the electronics around to be more like the a700, but otherwise it is the same. I'd check out the 200 and see if it is worth the changeover, or just grab a 100 while they're still cheap. Minolta lenses are solid too, so you've got the pawn shop scene to go through tons of good lenses.

 

[Derrict]

I'd recomend going the Sony route, to be different if not anything. I've met one person with the a100 in my entire ownership, and we had a good chat for a while about the camera and why more people don't have one.

Canon & Nikon are great because of the amount of marketshare they own, which results in higher supply of lenses and accessories, both new and used. It's very easy to find used camera gear for these bodies, especially Canon. Sony gear is not as common, so you'll end up paying for the Sony equivalent to the Canon or Nikon gear.

Sometimes it doesn't pay to be different.

 

[exigeracer]

I would look for Minolta lenses before Sony lenses anyways. I don't know how those compare, marketshare-wise, to Nikon and Canon. If you're looking around for a large variety of lenses, shouldn't you be also using a higher-end body? I'd think that an entry-level body wouldn't really need the huge supply of lenses when it's for an entry-level photog anyways.